欒書缶的年代、國別與器主

The Date, Regional Origin and Sponsor of Luanshu fou

關於欒書缶的鑄造背景，以往學者皆篤信春秋中期晉器說，直到一九九○年才有楚器說出現。主張楚器說的學者，對於該缶的鑄造年代，曾有春秋中期、春秋晚期、戰國早期、戰國中期、戰國或更後一些時期等多種看法，意見顯得相當分歧。欒書缶為春秋中期晉器之說，在各種楚器說陸續提出之後，不僅沒有立即退出歷史舞台，甚至依舊佔有比較優勢的地位。這個現象顯示，各種楚器說的說服力仍有不足之處，還無法徹底推翻春秋中期晉器說，贏得學界普遍認同，以致形成雙方僵持不下的尷尬局面。有關欒書缶的研究，不僅斷代、分域問題遲遲無法達成共識，甚至器主推求、器名擬定、器物辨偽、銘文通讀等方面也還存在若干疑義。這些問題長期懸置未決，不僅嚴重損害該缶的史料價值，甚至還會影響銅器銘文錯金工藝的起源年代問題，因而必須儘快謀求解決之道。針對上述問題，筆者綜合考察的結果，認為欒書缶應是戰國中期的楚式器，器主是晉國執政者欒書的後人「書也」，所以器名宜改稱為「書也缶」。至於銅缶及其銘文真偽問題，筆者根據缶銘文字構形判斷的結果，認為器腹部分應無後人偽造的嫌疑。

Previous scholarship has suggested Luanshu fou has been considered a Jin vessel cast during the mid Spring and Autumn period. In 1990, however, it was first suggested that it may be a Chu vessel. Proponents of the Chu-origin theory are divided among those who still hold that this fou was cast during the mid Spring and Autumn period, and others who suggest dates ranging from late Spring and Autumn period, to early Warring States, mid Warring States or even later. Opinions are clearly divided. The mid Spring and Autumn Jin origin hypothesis has not only resisted to withdraw since the appearance of the various Chu origin theories but has retained its dominant position. This shows that none of the various Chu theories are wholly satisfactory; they all still lack the persuasive ability to completely overturn the Jin origin hypothesis, and to become a generally accepted hypothesis. The debate has now reached a disconcerting deadlock. The study of the Luanshu fou has reached an impasse concerning not only dating and regional provenance, but also other aspects, including ascertaining the sponsor of the vessel, determining the vessel name, verifying the authenticity of the vessel type and reading of the inscription on the vessel. These longstanding unanswered questions have not only hampered evaluating the historical value of this particular fou, but have effected our understanding of the historical origins of inscribed bronze vessels. It is therefore necessary to find a way to resolve these issues soon. This paper has reached the following conclusions regarding the questions mentioned above: the Luanshu fou should be considered to be mid Warring States Chu-style vessel; the sponsor of the vessel was a descendent of the Jin official Luanshu, named Shuye. The vessel should therefore be named Shuye fou. Regarding the authenticity of the inscription on this bronze fou, I conclude, based on the stylistic form of the graphs, that there is no room to suspect late fabrication.